The 2026 FIFA World Cup is one of the most anticipated events in international sports, and fans worldwide are eager to predict their team's performance. As a data scientist, I developed a model to simulate the tournament one million times, forecasting outcomes from group stage progression to the eventual champion. Here’s how the model works and what it predicts.
Lessons from Recent History
The 2026 World Cup introduces a new format: 48 teams divided into 12 groups of four, increasing total matches from 64 to 104. This expansion aims to boost global participation and revenue. Looking at the seven 32-team tournaments since 1998, semi-final spots have been dominated by six nations: Argentina (2), Netherlands (3), Brazil (3), Croatia (3), France (4), and Germany (4). Including past winners England, Italy, and Spain, 78.6% of modern semi-finalists come from just nine nations. All 14 finalists since 1998 were from this group, with the last outsider finalist in 1962 (Czechoslovakia) and winner in 1950 (Uruguay).
Model Predictions
My simulation calculates each team's chances of advancing. For Australia, the model gives a 67.1% probability of escaping the group, 31.3% of winning the first knockout match, but only 1.0% of reaching the final and 0.3% of winning. Canada, as a host nation, has a 78.9% group stage exit chance, 37.9% for the first knockout, and similar 1.0% final and 0.3% win probabilities. New Zealand has a mere 19.5% chance of leaving the group and virtually no chance of winning. England, despite being fourth-favorite, has a lower win probability due to a recent rating drop after a loss to Japan.
The only teams with over 10% win probability are Spain (15.8%), France (15.6%), Argentina (15.3%), and England (11.0%)—all from the historical elite. However, the model estimates that only 54.2% of semi-final spots will go to these nine nations, down from 78.6%. Finalists from this group are projected at 63.6%, and champions at 72.6%, both lower than the historical 100%. This is partly due to Italy's absence. FIFA's new format reduces the dominance of traditional powers, but not drastically. If groups had been expanded to six teams instead of increasing the number of groups, the spread would be greater, but that would require at least 136 matches.
I thank Dr. Chris Bilson and Noah Stern for their assistance, and a careful reviewer for valuable comments.
